[PH3N0M]

Well, I don't know how in the hell Raptor X hard drives in RAID 0 score a 5.9 for performance but, okay. If that's not enough, how can GTX 285's score a 6.8? It makes no sense, at least to me.

[Judas]

Raid 0 has never showed me an improvement to the win vista and 7 scoreing...

never

Even my HD4870x2 only scores 6.1 i beleive

[PH3N0M]

Then what is supposed to score a 7.9? There's no game that I can't run with ease, and on max settings. I'm guessing the only way to get close to a 7 on Disk data transfer would probably be with a solid state.

[[hobo]eclipse]

not sure wat this means but, getting this with Xeon X3360 @ 3.57, 4GB DDR2 1120, 3870 (3d oc 860-1280 if that matters), with raid0 2x320GB sata 7200.9

[craig5320]

Maybe the motherboard is letting it down, causing a bottleneck or something. What you running?

[Tipstaff]

Remember though, that the scoring system is different with Windows 7 than it is for Vista. On my gaming rig (the specs listed to the left) I usually score about 7.3 for the most part, with my hard drive setup (Raptor X RAID 0 setup) holding me back at 5.9, and when I had 4GB of DDR2 in my system (2x2GB Corsair XMS2 CL5 kit) I was also getting a 5.9. As soon as I added another kit, bringing the total up to 8GBs, the scores for the ram went up to 7.3.

[PH3N0M]

Well, I understand the scoring system is different but I don't have too shabby of a rig, at least I don't think, so I can't figure out why I didn't score higher. I guess, as I stated previously, it will take a solid state drive to bring the score up. Needless to say, I won't be dropping the cash for those anytime soon. Much too pricey for the capacity to be so small.

[OldBuzzard]

Originally Posted by PH3N0M

Then what is supposed to score a 7.9? ...

Hardware that won't he available for another couple of years.

They need to score CURRENT hardware low so that there is 'room' for the newer faster systems that will be available in the future.

[Mac Daddy]

Originally Posted by OldBuzzard

Hardware that won't he available for another couple of years.

They need to score CURRENT hardware low so that there is 'room' for the newer faster systems that will be available in the future.

Exactly and I was thinking of posting this earlier but you said it better

+ rep

[Erroneus]

I believe you need a fast SSD to go above 5.9 in disk score

Here's mine from Windows 7 x64 build 7232.

[Judas]

i'm running a single Seagate 7200.10 and hit 6.0

[Erroneus]

That's a bit odd, considering the 7200.10 should be slower then my Samsung Spinpoint F1.

[Mac Daddy]

Here is mine with the latest hardware changes ......

[PH3N0M]

Originally Posted by Erroneus

That's a bit odd, considering the 7200.10 should be slower then my Samsung Spinpoint F1.

What's even more odd is that it scores higher than my Raptor hard drives.

[Erroneus]

True, but that just proves you can't use Windows 7 scores for anything :P

[Tipstaff]

Just out of curiosity, with the exception of PH3NOM, those running multiple hard drives, have you guys thought of running just one drive to see how you score? By this I mean no other drives attached except the one with the OS on it?

[Mac Daddy]

Originally Posted by Tipstaff

Just out of curiosity, with the exception of PH3NOM, those running multiple hard drives, have you guys thought of running just one drive to see how you score? By this I mean no other drives attached except the one with the OS on it?

Just running my WD 640G black on mine on this.

[isaak]

A bit old, but my score is 5.9 because of my harddrive. Graphics card gets 6.8 and CPU and RAM get 7.3

[blibbax]

I think the graphics score you're getting is oddest - there's no way a 3870 should be outperforming GTX285 SLI by any measure.

I'm not sure how reliable the rating system is though - my memory score in Vista didn't change going from 2GB 667mhz 4-4-4-12 single channel to 4GB 1066mhz 4-4-4-12 dual channel.

[Mac Daddy]

I don't think the performance score detects Crossfire or SLI in these tests mine hasn't changed.

[Zardon]

quite hilarous the Nehalem EP system with two xeon 5580 processors, 2gb 285GTX (OC) and 12gig of DDR3 with OCZ summit SSD gets a 7.9 in everything, yet the actual OS itself runs awful with CPU spikes every few seconds.

Sorry, just found it ironic enough to be worth a post while I go back to Vista 64bit ultimate for the 15th time.

[lepel]

Just installed 7. Liking it so far, but it froze one time already.

Funny thing is that my velociraptor is the "bottleneck" here and that in Vista, my CPU was. It bumped from 5.6 to 6.6 for the CPU...

[blibbax]

Originally Posted by Zardon

quite hilarous the Nehalem EP system with two xeon 5580 processors, 2gb 285GTX (OC) and 12gig of DDR3 with OCZ summit SSD gets a 7.9 in everything, yet the actual OS itself runs awful with CPU spikes every few seconds.

Sorry, just found it ironic enough to be worth a post while I go back to Vista 64bit ultimate for the 15th time.

So your GTX 285s are scoring 7.9!

Looks like we have another screwed up scoring system on our hands.

And why do you reckon it's not running properly? Do you think perhaps that it's as yet only optimised for relativley common hardware configurations?

[Stop It]

Well, the WPI gives me a 5.9, because of my HDD, heh.

the CPU and Ram both score 7.3 while my GFX card hits 7.4 twice.

In other news, I ordered Windows 7 Home Premium (E Edition, from Amazon at £44.97), yey :P

Originally Posted by Zardon

quite hilarous the Nehalem EP system with two xeon 5580 processors, 2gb 285GTX (OC) and 12gig of DDR3 with OCZ summit SSD gets a 7.9 in everything, yet the actual OS itself runs awful with CPU spikes every few seconds.

Sorry, just found it ironic enough to be worth a post while I go back to Vista 64bit ultimate for the 15th time.

And that frankly doesn't make sense, at all. It's typical though, Windows always seems to have issues with the craziest hardware, but hopefully such things should be fixed before it goes final.

[Zardon]

Originally Posted by blibbax

And why do you reckon it's not running properly? Do you think perhaps that it's as yet only optimised for relativley common hardware configurations?

No idea, but ive noticed some weird issues. Some SSD's get much lower scores for instance when they are just as fast. I am a firm believer that the built in benchmark system is not the greatest, never really was.

[Mac Daddy]

I tend to agree not an accurate representation of your overall system performance ... which it claims to be

[RE III - Frankie]

I am downloading Windows 7 as we speak. I already had the 64bit version, but my printer wasn't supported so I'm rolling back. Will post experience index here soon, today. If the upgrade goes well. Otherwise I'll be installing everything all over again and that could take all day and night. ----> I'm not installing Windowqs 7. Too much of my new stuff is incompatible with it. Like my new X-Fi sound card. My Microsoft LifeCam VX3000. My Canon printer which has worked very well for years (not supported at all). It's not fair. I just bought 2 sets of 2 inks for it as well. Oh well.

[PH3N0M]

Originally Posted by Stop It

Well, the WPI gives me a 5.9, because of my HDD, heh.

the CPU and Ram both score 7.3 while my GFX card hits 7.4 twice.

In other news, I ordered Windows 7 Home Premium (E Edition, from Amazon at £44.97), yey :P

And that frankly doesn't make sense, at all. It's typical though, Windows always seems to have issues with the craziest hardware, but hopefully such things should be fixed before it goes final.

I find it rather odd that your GTX 275 is hitting 7.4 when my 285's only hit 6.8. As Blibbax stated previously, it just goes to show that the scoring system is flawed.

[Tipstaff]

Another "just out of curiosity" question: what build of Windows 7 are you guys using? Are you using the one off of Microsofts site directly (build 7100), or are you guys using any of the interim builds?

[PH3N0M]

I'm using the Windows 7 Ultimate x64 RC-7100 that I downloaded from the website.